I'm posting this b/c it's intetesting....however on the other hand, the author shouldn't be doom and gloom before Rimm's roll out actually happens. The fact that Rimm's marketing chief is out just before the launch is what is worrisome.

Take care,

Jay

Lukewarm Reaction To Playbook Could Force Drastic Measures For RIM
Is Research in Motion (NSDQ: RIMM) turning into Palm (NSDQ: PALM), the next big prize in the mobile industry’s consolidation?

Two of the most important companies in the prehistoric era of the mobile computer (late 90s to mid 2000s) were Palm, inventor of the Palm Pilot and nurturer of the Treo, and RIM, which introduced a generation of business professionals to the value (and burden) of constant access to the office through the BlackBerry. But then came the iPhone, and Android. After a pretty hard fall and then a solid-but-unsustainable comeback with the Pre and WebOS, Palm was rescued by Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ) at the expense of a storied brand. RIM’s efforts to do something similar—bet the farm on a new operating system as well as a new form factor—are being treated with the worst of all reactions: indifference.

Two and a half weeks before RIM is scheduled to unveil the Playbook, its first tablet computer, it disappointed investors with its latest earnings report. Even more tellingly, it admitted that in order to achieve what co-CEO Jim Balsillie called demand for a “tonnage of apps” that RIM will support applications from a competing platform, Android. While the prospect of weaker profits and revenue over the next few months caused investors to flee RIM’s stock in droves on Friday, the bigger problem is long term: despite the face it still a huge player in the lucrative U.S. market, carriers, developers and investors are wary about betting on RIM.

—Rotten berries:A week’s worth of conversations with various members of the mobile industry at the CTIA Wireless conference produced little evidence of enthusiasm for either the Playbook or RIM development in general. Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android are both well-designed modern operating systems, but what has really helped them succeed is the overwhelming support of application developers, who know that they must be on both platforms to be seen as relevant.

Hardly anyone feels the same way about the BlackBerry OS, now an aging platform that’s almost in the same situation Palm found itself in a few years ago with the nearly-defunct Palm OS. Even Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7, with just months on the market and not even close to as much market share as RIM, is seen as a more intriguing platform.

The Playbook runs a new operating system built by QNX, a company RIM acquired in 2010. But developer support for that new operating system has also been rocky. One prospective RIM developer named Jamie Murai railed against the company’s difficult Playbook development process a month ago, writing “You have succeeded in your quest of driving away a perfectly willing developer from your platform.”

And the way RIM is going to add support for Android apps could be counterproductive. Android apps will need a special “app player” in order to run correctly on Playbooks, and the Playbook will only support apps written for Android 2.3; not the Android 3.0 version designed specifically for tablets. That means the apps may not run very well and may look funny on the much-larger screen used by the tablet compared to the smartphone screens for which they were designed. And should that happen, Playbook users will direct their ire at both RIM and app developers.

—Mistakes were made: What has happened to RIM, a company whose flagship product just a few years ago was good-naturedly compared to one of the most addictive drugs known to man? Any number of fingers can be pointed at factors like NTP, which distracted RIM’s upper management for years with a bitter patent suit that eventually cost the company over $600 million and untold legal fees. Maybe it was RIM’s conservative base of IT managers and corporations, which didn’t push the company to develop the Web browsing and application-development features that consumers gravitated toward once Apple (NSDQ: AAPL), and then Google (NSDQ: GOOG), showed them what could be possible. The company’s continued focus on hardware over software as its differentiating factor, when the industry was tacking the other way, certainly didn’t help.

It’s impossible to completely write off a company that still has sizable market share and profits, as well as a recognizable brand. But it’s also impossible to argue that RIM is on the cusp of turning its fortunes around: the Playbook is simply not compelling enough compared to either the iPad 2 or even the Xoom to be recognized in the mass market, and developers aren’t willing to help make up the difference. Meanwhile, RIM’s smartphones look increasingly pedestrian against iPhone and Android models, not to mention Windows Phone 7.

Curious statements from the company’s leaders certainly don’t help. Mike Lazaridis, RIM’s other co-CEO, wasn’t quite as clueless as some made him out to be in an appearance at the D: Dive Into Mobile conference in December, but he did speak in the type of jargon and vague syntax that only a management consultant could love, rather than addressing concerns about RIM’s strategies head-on. On Thursday’s conference call, Balsillie said anticipated demand for the Playbook was strong, citing several companies wanting to order “tens of thousands of units.” He must know that even the most conservative estimates for iPad 2 sales so far, after just two weeks of sales, are in the 5-million-unit range, and most are quite higher.

—Lead, Follow, Merge: What does RIM need to do to get back on track? The only nice thing about a slow decline is that it gives RIM’s management some time to figure how to get its groove back. But RIM is in need of a breakthrough: it’s the same kind of problem faced by those trying to chase Google in Web search. They can’t just try to match Google blow for blow, they have to come up with something truly different and compelling to shift user behavior.

RIM hasn’t come up with a product like that in years. And it seems pretty clear that Android support or not, few outside the company think the Playbook will change anything. Could it be time for drastic action?

HP bought Palm as part of an attempt by an old-school PC company to get in on a new generation of computing. We’ve known for a long time that consolidation of the five surviving mobile operating systems is inevitable, and perhaps the old-school PC company, Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT), is finally ready to make an honest man or woman out of all the rumormongers predicting a Microsoft-RIM merger for years. With a market cap of only $29.5 billion following Friday’s sell-off, and an enterprise-oriented customer base already friendly with Microsoft, there might be no time like the present.

Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group

The problem for RIM, how to keep IT happy along with consumers. They may have to split into divisions if they want to sell more. Consumers want things that IT will not allow for corporate devices and that's the reason why BB is as bland as it is.

Look at it this way. Do you want to pay for your employees to watch TV and stream music or did you provide(or pay the bill) those phones for work? If IT would loosen up, RIM could be free to make better devices. Even on my phone(not a BES), permissions are required that are more stringent than Android's. Plus security checks on full reboots(which no other current phone requires BTW). That alone tells you that RIM is actually corporate.

HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!

Sounds like they're expecting corporate sales. Notice he didn't even mention consumers: "On Thursday’s conference call, Balsillie said anticipated demand for the Playbook was strong, citing several companies wanting to order “tens of thousands of units.”

HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!

Sounds like they're expecting corporate sales. Notice he didn't even mention consumers: "On Thursday’s conference call, Balsillie said anticipated demand for the Playbook was strong, citing several companies wanting to order “tens of thousands of units.”

Hi,

Thanks Ms. Diva as always you are right on the money!

take care,

Jay

Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group

I don't plan on buying anything before I get a chance to try it and see if it is all that I expect. Coming close to webOS is not webOS by a longshot and everything else for me is simply "Other!" Sorli...

But I thought you had to have a BlackBerry to get full use out of it. You know what that means, if true. Corporate customers are more likely. Consumers with BBs(those not required for work) probably got the iPad or something else. Although there's still a chance that BB consumers may get the PlayBook. I'm just not convinced it will be huge number. True Crackberry addicts probably, and there are indeed some.

Originally Posted by Rainforrest

I'm a non-business consumer and I pre-ordered a 32gb BlackBerry PlayBook. I believe they will sell plenty if it is advertised well.

HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!

Maybe we should wait for more reviews though. Every one we've seen was on unfinished models, right? As long as it's not like the Xoom(so unfinished it's annoying) and provided RIM loosens up and convinces businesses to do so, maybe it has a chance.

HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!

HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!

The problem with positioning something as "corporate" makes it sound, (and usually behave) particularly anti-consumer. No consumer wants a "business" tool. The PB is trying to be both, and that seldom works.

This is my concern for the TP, as well. HP can't help but present WebOS as a business solution, and try to straddle the line between corporate and consumer. One lesson everyone should have learned by now is the best way to break into corporate is to produce a no-compromise, consumer product that is so universally desirable, the consumers bring those devices to work and demand to use them there.

Things that are self-consciously corporate tend to skimp on, or limit consumer functionality. It is better to have a consumer device that gets enterprise features added, rather than have an enterprise device with consumer features added. RIM is held hostage by their enterprise base. HP has many of the same issues. It will be interesting to see if they handle them differently.

It has both, maybe it's worth a second look. I just don't like the fact that you need a BB for the important things, that limits its consumer appeal.

HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!

I think as an Android tablet, the Playbook has a lot going for it (I'm calling it an Android tablet because it runs Android apps). It's more attractive than the majority of Android tablets out there. Maybe the indifference is exactly because most people are seeing it as "just another Android tablet".

The only big strike against it is that it won't support Honeycomb apps, only Gingerbread apps. To get tablet apps, you'll need developers to develop native Playbook apps. When you have the option of dedicating time to develop for an entirely new platform, or developing for Android and using Androdid emulation to run on the Playbook, I think most developers will follow the Android gravy train.

This will have very few native apps / since they are encouraging ports of android.. And they are limiting the ports to 2.3 ... But what are the incentives for devs to port?? This is no diff than PDK which allows easy porting of iOS and andy apps..

So lets recap:
-No Native Dev support
-Possible andy app support for 2.3
-No Incentive for devs to create Native apps
-No Incentives for devs to port (the argument of why NOT port is not valid as why not port to webos)

I'm sorry, but I have a slightly different take on all of this....I disagree b/c webOS is sitting on tons of HP's cash which will get app totals up even if HP has to pay to have them ported as opposed to Rim who is extremely short on cash!

Take care,

Jay

Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group

I'm sorry, but I have a slightly different take on all of this....I disagree b/c webOS is sitting on tons of HP's cash which will get app totals up even if HP has to pay to have them ported as opposed to Rim who is extremely short on cash!

Take care,

Jay

Agree with this. HP is not betting the house on webOS, while RIM needs the Playbook to succeed. If the Playbook doesn't succeed, it won't look good for the future of QNX on smartphones. RIM's stock will continue dropping, and then they'll be in REALLY big trouble. If the Touchpad doesn't succeed for HP, they already have another tablet coming later this year, and they can go back to the drawing board for further tablets down the road. Plus, HP has the Veer and Pre 3 lined up. If any of these products flop for HP, you'll most likely barely notice the effect on HP's stock. If the Playbook flops, you'll most likely see RIM's stock value take a nosedive.